Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 4

ESTIMATION OF THE DETERMINANTS OF LONG RUN ECONOMIC GROWTH IN TURKEY BY USING THE ARDL, FMOLS, DOLS, AND CCR APPROACHES

TÜRKİYE’DE UZUN DÖNEM EKONOMİK BÜYÜMENİN BELİRLEYİCİLERİNİN ARDL, FMOLS, DOLS VE CCR YÖNTEMLERİYLE TAHMİNİ

Pages
39–58
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Empirical results show that the determinants of long run economic growth are the growth of physical capital stock and the growth of energy use.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is twofold; the first one is, by using “Augmented Neo-classical Growth Model” as a base, to investigate the determinants of the long-run economic growth of Turkey benefiting from the ARDL approach for the period of 1965 to 2015, using annual data.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The second aim is to confirm and emphasize the results of ARDL approach by using the new co-integration methods of FMOLS, DOLS and CCR.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Empirical results show that the determinants of long run economic growth are the growth of physical capital stock and the growth of energy use.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Ekonomik Büyüme · ARDL · FMOLS

Abstract

The aim of this study is twofold; the first one is, by using “Augmented Neo-classical Growth Model” as a base, to investigate the determinants of the long-run economic growth of Turkey benefiting from the ARDL approach for the period of 1965 to 2015, using annual data. The second aim is to confirm and emphasize the results of ARDL approach by using the new co-integration methods of FMOLS, DOLS and CCR. Empirical results show that the determinants of long run economic growth are the growth of physical capital stock and the growth of energy use. However, empirical results support that, different from the literature, the contribution of human capital to economic growth in Turkey is none or weakly statistically significant.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın iki amacı vardır; birincisi, Genişletilmiş Neo-Klasik Büyüme Modeline dayanan bütüncül bir üretim fonksiyonunu temel alarak 1965-2015 yılları arasında ARDL yaklaşımı ile Türkiye’de uzun dönem ekonomik büyümenin temel belirleyicilerini araştırmaktır. İkincisi ise ARDL yöntemi ile elde edilen sonuçları yeni eş-bütünleşme metotlarından olan FMOLS, DOLS ve CCR yöntemlerinden yararlanarak doğrulamak ve elde edilen sonuçların güvenilirliğini artırmaktır. Ampirik bulgular Türkiye’de uzun dönem ekonomik büyümenin temel belirleyicilerinin sermaye stokundaki ve enerji tüketimindeki artışların olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca sonuçlar, literatürün aksine, beşeri sermayenin ekonomik büyümeye katkısının olmadığını veya varsa zayıf bir etkisinin olduğunu ifade etmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TİRYAKİ, A., CEYLAN, R., ERDOĞAN, L. (2022). ESTIMATION OF THE DETERMINANTS OF LONG RUN ECONOMIC GROWTH IN TURKEY BY USING THE ARDL, FMOLS, DOLS, AND CCR APPROACHES. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 4, 39–58. https://ajindex.com/articles/532978

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Adebola, S.S. (2011), “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: Trivariate Investigation in Botswana with Capital Formation” International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Volume 1, No.2, 32–46.
  2. Alaali, F., Roberts, J. ve Taylor, K. (2015), “The Effect of Energy Consumption and Human Capital on Economic Growth: An Exploration of Oil Exporting and Developed Countries”, Working Paper, Sheffield Economic Research Paper Series (SERPS), SERPS (015), Department of Economics, University of Sheffield, UK, 1-24.
  3. Altınay, G. ve Karagöl, E. (2004),”Structural Break, Unit Root, and The Causality Between Energy Consumption and GDP in Turkey”, Energy Economics, Volume 26, Issue 6, 985–994.
  4. Altınay, G. ve Karagöl, E. (2005), “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: Evidence for Turkey”, Energy Economics, 27, Issue 6, 849–856.
  5. Amar, M.B. (2013), “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: The Case of African Countries”, The Journal of Energy and Development, Volume 38, No. 1/2, 65–78.
  6. Apergis, N. ve Payne, J.E. (2009a), “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in Central America: Evidence from A Panel Cointegration and Error Correction Model”, Energy Economics, Volume 31, Issue 2, 211–216.
  7. Apergis, N. ve Payne, J.E. (2009b), “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: Evidence from the Commonwealth of Independent States”, Energy Economics, Volume 31, Issue 5, 641–647.
  8. Asafu-Adjaye, J. (2000), “The Relationship Between Energy Consumption, Energy Prices, and Economic Growth: Time Series Evidence from Asian Developing Countries”, Energy Economics, Volume 22, Issue 6, 615–625.
  9. Asafu-Adjaye J., Byrne D. ve Alvarez M. (2016), “Economic Growth, Fossil Fuel and Non-Fossil Consumption: A Pooled Mean Group Analysis Using Proxies for Capital”, Energy Economics, Volume 60, 345-356.
  10. Barro, R. J. (1996), “Determinants of Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Empirical Study”, National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper No. 5698 (w5698), 1-118.
  11. Barro, R.J., ve Lee, J. (2015), “Barro-Lee Educational Attainment Dataset”, http://www.barrolee.com, E.T.: 20.07.2017.
  12. Beaudreau, B. C. (1995), “The Impact of Electric Power on Productivity: a Study of US Manufacturing 1950–1984”,
  13. Energy Economics, Volume 17, Issue 3, 231-236.
  14. Bildirici, M.E., Bakırtaş, T. ve Kayıkçı, F. (2012), “Economic Growth and Electricity Consumption: Auto Regressive Distributed Lag Analysis”, Journal of Energy in Southern Africa, Volume 23, No.4, 29-45.
  15. Bildirici, M.E. ve Bakırtaş, T. (2014), “The Relati